According to the broschure descring the new Leica M (p. 22), from which I borrow the drawing shown below of the sensor architecture of a "standard CMOS sensor" (not the one used by Leica M), "rays of incoming light at large angles of incidence can fail to reach the photodiode of the corresponding pixel and reach only the adjacent pixel". One possibility is the one shown by the drawing, where a photon passes directly through the filter of one pixel and then on to the photodiode of another. Another possibility, not shown in this drawing, is that a photon is reflected, after having passed the filter of one pixel, in such a way as to end up at the photodiode of another pixel.

Thanks a lot for the test and writing.

Glad you appreciated it.

I have just one comment regarding microlenses and CFA effect. Take a look at the picture at the bottom of my post. I took it from mu-43.com forum and it was shot with OM-D and 7-14mm wide open (aperture blades didn't impact the flare).

I'm sure the purple flare you see is a result of reflection between sensor and rear lens element. You can see the pattern of the blinds appearing on the wall. The pattern is smaller than real blinds pattern probably because the rear element is a bit concave? (I don't have 7-14mm)

Based on this I think the only thing we can tell for sure is that OM-D sensor is too reflective under certain conditions such as certain light angles and wavelength(s). The resulting reflected wavelength appears purple in sensor output. Reflectivity and coating of lens rear element most likely also plays some role.

How do you arrive at the conclusion that the flare results from a reflection off the sensor, hitting the rear element and then bouncing back to the sensor again. As far as I can see, this is not a necessary ingredient, and I don't it particularly likely (although I am not in a position to conclusively rule it out).

I arrived at this conclusion because it seemed the most logical explanation of the image I showed below.If someone has better explanation of why blind pattern is shown as reflected on the left side I would be interested to hear it.

Also there are many other image samples showing multiple flare orbs, like in this post from this thread:http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/50958176If you think this is not a result of multiple reflections between sensor and rear lens element I would like to know a better theory explaining this.

Ordinary internal reflections within the lens. If you look at further examples from the same poster as the one you linked to here

in this case using the GF1 along with the E-M5, you can see the same type of reflections from both cameras. The only difference is that with the E-M5, some of the reflections are intensely purple.

Essentially the same result has been reached in a large number of prior comparisons. The main difference between the E-M5 and other cameras is not that the E-M5 show reflections/flare that the others lack. It's that the reflections become intensely purple, and therefore far more noticeable (they might be barely visible otherwise), with the E-M5. Luminance can also be affected in addition to color. Since the red and blue channels are amplified far more than green (about twice as much in ordinary daylight), the average of the three colors also increases when green light escapes to the blue and red channels.

Ordinary reflections from the lens can't explain why purple flare is a killer issue on OM-D and 2012 Pens with 7-14mm but not on other cameras with the same exact lens.

Sure, you may see the same orbs on other sensors in extreme conditions and they may be grey. But, statistically, I think, there are too many examples already showing that purple flare on OM-D is clearly more apparent than with other cameras.

Sure. That's what we have know all along. And I stressed again in the section you quote above. The E-M5 sensor is prone to color-channel pollution. Some other sensors are not.

Now, let's think that there is no light reflection between sensor and rear lens element. That purple light has to go somewhere on sensors other than OM-D. It won't just disappear, in case of no color cross-talk it would have to result at least grey flare. Since statistically not many issues like these are reported I would conclude that other reflecting element is involved. In this case it can only be rear lens element.

There is no purple light hitting the sensor. The whole point of my theory is that the purple appearance is effectively created by the sensor due to color-channel pollution and color-channel imbalance as explained here:

Does the light that gives rise to the purpleness on the E-M5 hit the sensor on other cameras too? Sure, in which case it gives rise to gray/white reflections rather than purple.

And you didn't answer how would you explain the blind pattern on the wall on image I showed. The rear lens element of 7-14mm is a little concave isn't it? And that's why the reflected pattern is smaller than real blind, no?

Here's the 7-14 on the G1 with a whole series of reflections (I see at least five) like the one you illustrate but without a trace of purple:

Where the reflection on sensor happens exactly is not clear. But it is possible that purple cast appears because reflected light passes through CFA and the CFA affects reflection in some irregular way. I would think purple color is a result of light passing through both red and blue filters, omitting green. In this case the light would have to be close to diagonal because red and blue only have common corners. But, since we also see horizontal and vertical flares the issue is probably more complicated.

If different wavelengths would behave slightly differently when it comes to reflection (as they are known to do; why is the sky blue?), then blue and red would likely behave most differently with green inbetween. Note also that the evidence we have so far suggests that channel pollution is more likely (perhaps only possible) vertically and horizontally, not diagonally.